I think this sort of thing is very helpful because it makes it very clear that much spending is small fry compared to the giants of Medicaid, Medicare and Defense. It's also great because many of the less numerate members of this site frequently make non-quantitative claims that are clearly spurious when one examines the figures.

There's plenty of room here for left and right wingers---report your solutions to the deficit crisis!

I tried to avoid tax increases for ordinary people, however the Bush tax cuts for >250k had to be made to expire to close the gap. With the estate tax, which is an evil tax in my opinion, I went with the lowest tax option.

And just slash slash slash that military.

I guess most of my money came from the "Cap medicare in 2013" option. Even though I personally wouldn't be in favor of it, the amount of cash involved is so huge that there really is no other choice. In parallel the health care system itself should be reformed, though.

Ok, now that we've had a few successes, let's have all of you work together to make the decisions. Oh, and in a few years we'll get together a group of your polar opposites to re-balance the budget. Lather, rinse, repeat...

OK, people, the sensible thing which almost everybody has done here seems to be a combination of cuts (especially to the military) and increasing taxes.I'm all ears to hear from socal,SB, riddler, aunty_jack...wait--I can't since I blocked them!

Karnage saidOk, now that we've had a few successes, let's have all of you work together to make the decisions. Oh, and in a few years we'll get together a group of your polar opposites to re-balance the budget. Lather, rinse, repeat...

Most seemed like common sense. I tried not to raise taxes on anyone other than the super rich, who've proven time and again that they keep any tax savings they garner.

I didn't even touch earmarks - those things usually fund a lot of jobs. And the notion that we should slash the national parks and such boils my blood. Some things we as a nation need to take pride in and take care of. Argh.

Ok, I got us big surpluses by 2015 and bigger ones by 2030 with the money coming about half from savings and half from higher taxes.

There should be little problem in going back to Clinton-era tax rates. That was, after all a period of sustained economic growth as well as consistent budget surpluses. I actually think that some of the military cuts could be more aggressive.

I did it with the bulk of my work coming from cutting military spending and repealing some tax cuts. This was really eye-opening but as a federal contractor I know that millions of people work in some of these defense spending areas. That's a lot of jobs and industry that would go under with the proposed cuts. Not that I'm suggesting we keep them working just for the sake of it, but in many cases its a very specialized market that won't be available again at the drop of a hat if shit pops off and we have a greater need later.

flieslikeabeagle saidOk, I got us big surpluses by 2015 and bigger ones by 2030 with the money coming about half from savings and half from higher taxes.

There should be little problem in going back to Clinton-era tax rates. That was, after all a period of sustained economic growth as well as consistent budget surpluses. I actually think that some of the military cuts could be more aggressive.

Ultimately, whoever has the least clout in terms of lobbyists in Washington (i.e. the middle class) will have their box checked (i.e. SS, Medicare). Don't even think the military-industrial complex and the top 1% wealthy people will allow their boxes to be checked.

q1w2e3 saidUltimately, whoever has the least clout in terms of lobbyists in Washington (i.e. the middle class) will have their box checked (i.e. SS, Medicare). Don't even think the military-industrial complex and the top 1% wealthy people will allow their boxes to be checked.

That's probably the reason why the federal govt will fail miserably at balancing the books.

Interesting about this 'game' is that it shows you that it IS possible to balance the books in the near future, it just requires some painful decisions to be made.

So I know it is un-American to look to other countries for examples, but the US might wanna have a look at the UK for an actionable approach in which VERY painful measures are being taken, but a government that actually does what has to be done.

TRDMRK saidalso, balancing the federal budget would probably be a lot easier if there were some goods under production... those of u playing that game, i sure hope opening up a factory of some sort was one of the options.

A federal government dealing with planning of factories and production of goods? That game is called a command economy.